Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8425287" data-attributes="member: 42582">To me, there seem to be two readings of in accordance with: a causal reading; and a consistency reading. I've got nothing against the second - the goals etc set some sort of soft/fuzzy boundary of tenability/plausibility around a character's reactions and responses. I tend to find the first implausible. It's a creative decision, what a character does.I think whether a player learns something moral-political from their creative play is a separate thing, that depends on further aspects of personality etc. Eg, and at a risk of painting with a broad brush, and given my impressions of the two people I'm about to mention, I would expect this more from (eg) Picasso than from Eric Hobsbawm. I don't think these personality differences necessarily tell us anything more about the virtue/character of the person.Here's an example from my own play (Burning Wheel) where the fiction led me to develop a character:For my part, I think the fiction has to get pretty emotionally laden for these sorts of things to feel "emergent" rather than "deliberate".</blockquote>